With the blogosphere still reeling from the epochal sensation of our Hoods & Services Issue, the Prince of Petworth speaks out on McKenna’s coverage of Notyetworth. The Prince’s beef can be summed up in his second sentence:
The essay and “arbitrary rankings” were written by Dave McKenna who bought a house in Petworth in 2002. And it seems as though the article was written about the Petworth of 2002, a beautiful place for sure, but neglects much of the massive development/improvements that have taken place in the subsequent six years.
Also of note is the Prince’s objection to the nomenclature:
Finally, I think the name is ridiculous. I know the authors had to come up with witty neighborhood names but I just don’t get “Notyetworth”. What does that mean? The houses aren’t worth that much money? It is not yet worth living here? Even in 2002 this was a beautiful neighborhood that was certainly “worth” a lot to the many residents living here at the time.
The rest of it isn’t exactly scathing, but it’s strongly worded—more in the tough love category than anything else. Meanwhile, the blog’s loyal serfs weigh in with comments à propos and otherwise. Juicier bits:
[From Christina:] I thought “Notyetworth” was kind of clever. I live here, and I like it, but it’s not quite yet….[fill in the blank.] It’s a neighborhood that is going through an interesting and sometimes painful transition. But I like the energy that comes with change, with being in a state of “not-yetness.”
[From Anonymous:] At least you don’t live in Bloomingale, which they “ranked” lower than Deanwood and Anacostia as a place to live. The whole thing makes me pissed off. Typical City Paper snark without the insight.
[From Toby:] But y’all gotta admit the articles are hysterical. Upper Caucasia? Episcopalia? Turretts Syndrome?
[From Markus:] The Petworth article was written in a different style than the other pieces, I thought. Maybe it’s b/c McKenna usually writes thoughtful sports columns that are often focused on old-school DC stuff, but the Notyetworth section definitely strayed from the formula that almost all of the other reviews follwed.
[From DCer]: Arguing with a half-assed, non-fact-checked, City Paper article as if it was thoughtfully written is the READER’S mistake and not the mistake of the City Paper. When you realize that the writers themselves do not care what the heck they write, then the whole paper starts to make a lot more sense and you enjoy it more.
My thoughts precisely, DCer. But a bonus question for those who hate the player rather than the game:
What’s the best neighborhood nickname we should’ve used but didn’t?
Entries will be judged based on degree of snark and dearth of insight.